Petty Rules of Civil Procedure
Revised Ed. (2024)
A practitioner recently brought to the Court’s attention that, while we have in previous decisions referenced our procedural rules, the Court has not published them in full. Because we are a wise and benevolent Court, we now publish the revised and annotated Petty Rules of Civil Procedure for the reference of all would-be petty litigants.
Rule 1. Fairness
We do what we want.
Comment: Some practitioners have asked: "Why write a comprehensive set of procedural rules if the first rule is that the Court does what it wants?" We encourage them to see Rule 1.
Rule 2. 1Ls
1Ls always lose unless it is funnier for them to win.
Comment: For the purposes of Rule 2, and the Petty Rules of Civil Procedure in General, LL.M.s are not considered part of the 1L class unless the complaint is one related to the first year at the Law School.
Rule 3. The Bit
(a) Our commitment is to the Bit. Therefore:
(1) The funniest outcome must necessarily prevail.
(2) In cases where both outcomes are equally funny, the most absurd outcome shall prevail.
Rule 4. There is one form of action—the Petty Action.
(a) A Petty Action is commenced by filing a petty complaint with the Court.
(b) Constructive Pettiness. Where the context in which a case arises is petty, that pettiness may be construed to apply to the entire case, even if the underlying issue would not otherwise fall into this Court’s pettiness jurisdiction.
Rule 5. General Rules of Pleading
(a) Claim for Butting In. A pleading that asks the Court to settle a petty dispute must contain:
(1) an angry or insane rambling that gets across the gist of the problem;
(2) at least a couple of sentences that look something like law; and
(3) the relief sought and “pretty please” or something to that effect.
(b) Defenses.
(1) A party may file a response to a petty pleading, but we’ll probably ignore it unless it includes:
(A) money;
(B) an even pettier counterclaim;
(C) juicy gossip; or
(D) surprisingly accurate adherence to the Court’s precedent.
Comment: These General Rules remain subject to Rule 1, as the Court may take on any case it wishes.
Rule 6. Objecting to a Ruling or Order
(a) Decisions of this Court can be appealed only to God. Good luck.
(b) If someone’s gonna bitch about the Court, we want to hear it directly. Submit it. We dare you.
Comment: Given this Court’s previous suits against the Almighty, this Court has not yet ruled on whether Divine decisions which are not directly remanded back to the Court may be appealed.
Rule 7. Pretrial Conferences
If the parties wish to duke it out among themselves before the Court issues its opinion, we’re cool with that. Fair warning—we will probably use this as an opportunity to make fun of you in the opinion.
Comment: Pretrial conferences between parties have no preclusive effect on this Court, subject to Rules 1 and 3. The Court reserves the right to rule on any case which passes its doors, even those which have ostensibly settled their differences prior to the ruling. Mootness only applies subject to Rule 3, if it is funnier for it to do so.
Rule 8. Intervention
We love a good pile-on, so anyone is welcome to intervene, as long as they’re angry at one of the parties. The more, the pettier.
Rule 10. Summary Judgment
(a) Parties are encouraged to move for summary judgment at any point in the litigation process. We’d like to get on with it. A motion for summary judgment must be accompanied by:
(1) insult(s) directed at the opposing party;
(2) in the movant’s view, a description of the funniest outcome of the case; and
(3) some light reading for our entertainment.
Rule 11. Formatting
(a) All documents must be submitted in Jokerman font.
(b) Don’t underline things. Just stop. Use italics.
(c) If you do not use Oxford commas, we will rule against you faster than a death row inmate before Sam Alito.
(d) Fix hanging words. We will not read them.
Rule 12. Defenses and Objections
(a) Defendants are encouraged to delay filing their answer until the date that will most piss off the opposing party. But note that we might just decide to go ahead with the case without your response.
(b) Every defense to a claim for butting in must be shouted from the Law School rooftops (or emailed to the Court). But a party may assert the following defenses by motion:
(1) lack of petty jurisdiction;
(2) typo in complaint, idiot!;
(3) really just not interested in this rn;
(4) male living space venue;
(5) failure to state a petty claim; and
(6) unqualified filer (1L, resident of Massachusetts, etc.)
Comment: We arguably have personal jurisdiction over everyone. Because all humans have deliberately availed themselves of pettiness at one point or another.
Rule 13. Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
(a) A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within:
(1) 21 days after serving it, or
(2) 22 days after serving, if during a leap year.
(b) In all other cases, a party may amend its pleading only after begging on their hands and knees.
(c) On second thought, ignore all of the above. For the love of God, don’t bother. Whatever you filed in the first instance, we likely barely read it.
Rule 14. Applicability of the Rules
(a) If you’re rude, the Court may favor the opposing party in interpreting and applying these Rules.
(b) On the other hand, we’re not above a little bribery. Note: The Chief Justice loves a good croissant.
Rule 15. Recusals
Justices are not precluded from presiding over a case that involves any conflict of interest, up to and including decisions affecting the Justices themselves.
Comment: We modeled this one on the U.S. Supreme Court, and it’s been working pretty well for us.
Rule 16. Interpleader
Oh God, not this shit.
Comment: You cannot make me go back into my CivPro notes and read about this.
Rule 17. Help.
(a) All procedure and no substance makes the Court write dull opinions.
(b) All procedure and no substance makes the Court write dull opinions.
(c) All procedure and no substance makes the Court write dull opinions.
(d) All procedure and no substance makes the Court write dull opinions.
Rule 18. Justices shouldn't be assholes.
Comment: This rule is subject to the limitations of Rule 1.
Rule 19. Any rules not listed in this collection yet subsequently referenced by the Court are valid and within this Court’s discretion, so long as they do not conflict with an written rule absent clear and convincing language that the Court intends to overturn a previously established rule.
---